Skip to main content
12:00 pm
12:01 pm
12:02 pm
12:03 pm
12:04 pm
12:05 pm
12:06 pm
12:07 pm
12:08 pm
12:09 pm
12:10 pm
12:11 pm
12:12 pm
12:13 pm
12:14 pm
12:15 pm
12:16 pm
francisco for the top city, i guess doing business, which comes as a surprise to many commenters and somewhat as a surprise to me. we will certainly take it. it might be based upon part of what was written in another article but carl nulte sunday when he talks about the sales force and good things we are seeing.
12:17 pm
however it was entitled, ignoring a beautiful and ugly city is crazy. i agree with carl. i believe he's made good statements. his comments, not mine, he talked about some of the people on the street. he felt they weren't just foreclosed homeowners but people who have long-term serious problems. yet everybody ignores this, has been for decades. i think he makes good points and ends his article by saying we pretend this doesn't exist. san francisco needs a psychiatrist, which is a well-written article. part of this, there is a positive note, however. there is legislation introduced and i believe passed on first reading to ban our vehicles over night. many are housing unit wes don't deal with. we deal with mergers, decks, a bunch of things that are important. we deal nothing with a lot of the housing that is not
12:18 pm
housing that comes under the auspiceses of houses within houses. i think it is time this is dealt with. i applaud supervisors carmen chu and malia cohen who authorized this legislation. it is about time. i applaud bevin dufty who testified he felt there was room at shell thers. if not we should provide for shelters. * civilized societies need rules. if we didn't everybody would be crashing into each other. we don't seem to have rules about habitation in a lot of san francisco. i think we need more of that in the future. i'm happy to see that. i think that it is a step in the right direction that somebody is actually stepping up to the plate and addressing one of these concerns. hopefully we will see more of that. >> commissioner borden. >> a few things.
12:19 pm
first is i want to mention again that urban solutions two blocks of art, which is -- they will have all the businesses along the corridor of sixth between market and howard. we will have art installations inside, ranging from laundry mats and small stores. then there is a little program and a great studio right there. so it is 4 p.m. to 8 p.m. friday of this week. if you can make it by tomorrow, that would be great to do. i also wanted to recognize the planning department, which i know got an award for their property information map. i think that is incredible. i know i personally use that a lot as well. that makes me sound more smart when people ask my questions, because i know it is there. the final question i have is regarding the blight ordinance and properties who have entitlements, where there might be trash. is that a dpw issue, is that a planning commission
12:20 pm
approval? i know that sometimes when properties are not -- they have been entitled but there is no building permits pulled yet. there are issues with trash and debris and a blight ordinance. i don't know how the two work together if at all. i was cuisiner to know. >> i believe that is a dpw issue. *. when we are in the field we try to contact dpw. we don't have the power but rely on dpi and building issue we rely on dbi. >> thanks. >> commissioner sugaya. >> yes. there was something in the pipe wer respect to the puc leasing * spaces in the garage. could we get a little more information. i don't know if that is for employee spaces or somehow connected with you are doing business with the puc
12:21 pm
you can park in one of their spaces. i don't know. it seems to go against the transit first policy. >> i will find out for you. >> it hinted that reck park was losing money because of the parking situation in various -- i guess because it is under civic center park. but that also is kind of an ironic thing because we are trying to be transit-first, which means rec park shouldn't be making money off parking, or something like that. >> commissioner moore. >> there was an interesting article the other day about ucsf growing in a manner that they might bump up against the cap in their mission bay area, but also as it relates to the previous master plan protections. there are two aspects of
12:22 pm
this article, which i meant to fit in. one the master plan is exemplary to what the city, planning department. we need to understand what institution tries to do, project what it will do, how it operators, how it groups buildings ordeals with transportation. something which we have not been appraised to * for quite sometime. the second aspect of this particular article is interesting to me because will it require potentially revisiting mission bay. i would be very curious to see the director and department keep us appraised or updated on how that might occur, so it is a lesson for all of us in terms of other institutions. but i think this particular case is a very positive one by which the department early on knows what to be prepared for. so i think we could use
12:23 pm
that to start developing language and some type idea of what a master plan needs to be. >> commissioners, if i can just have a moment. hopefully i won't break down with this. i announced at the beginning of the year that i would retire. but i promised i would stay until we found a replacement for me. unfortunately that has taken a long time. much longer than i anticipated. with some family issues that have come up recently, i have set my date. my last day in the office will be october 31st. and i just want to thank you all and wish you the best. i'm here if you need me but i do have to leave. >> thank you. we completely understand that situation and wish you all the best. >> thank you. >> commissioner moore.
12:24 pm
>> if i may ask the subcommittee of three commissioners, commissioner antonini, commissioner borden and myself have been assisting commissioner avery to find a replacement. that process is not as complete as we would like. in your absence and even as you indicated you would return in november that you would be available as a consultant to us to help us carry this through in a manner that we all had created the mission to do so. >> commissioners, if it is the commission's desire for me to come -- i will be gone for the month of november to take care of my family's issues. if it is the desire of the commission, i am more than willing to come back in a consultant capacity to help
12:25 pm
with the secretary's search. not the functions of the commission secretary so much but with that search. that's about with my responsibilities to my family, that is about the most i can do. >> i assume the subcommittee, which is comprised of both planning, commission and historic preservation can discuss it in the october meetings so we have a clear idea of how we navigate ourselves through this very difficult task. >> commissioner antonini. >> i would certainly be supportive of that and wish you well, linda. we would very much like to be able to ask your advise about issues as we move forward. unfortunately you are one of the only one who has answers on some of these issues. that would be very gracious if you are available as a consultant in the future. >> well, congratulations. i'm going to kind of ask the subcommittee when they next get together sort of
12:26 pm
accelerate things. i think linda has offered maybe her services, but i don't think that the commission should count on that necessarily. so i'm hopeful the subcommittee can get its work done in a timely manner. >> with that, commissioners -- and excuse me. we should move on to the director's report. director's announcement and review of the board of supervisors, board of appeals and historic preservation commission. >> thank you. good afternoon, commissioners. i just wanted to apprise you of -- i think anne marie probably has this in her presentation that the action the board of supervisors took this week on legislation related to the successor agency of redevelopment. as you know, the state legislature passed trailing legislation in last year's budget that would, again, change the rules.
12:27 pm
while the first round allowed for redevelopment and successor agencies to be part and parcel of city government or county government, depending on the jurisdiction, this round of legislation literally requires them to be separate from city and county. as of the effective date of this legislation, the successor agency is technically a separate entity from the city. in addition, the legislation that the mayor put forward that the board passed would create a separate board so there would be two entities. the oversight board i sit on would continue to exist but only be responsible for the fiduciary you responsibilities, the financial obligations if you recall what is called the recognized obligation payment schedule that we are required to submit to the state every six months. the second board would be composed of citizens appointed by the mayor, endorsed by the board,
12:28 pm
which would review entitlements, review projects and somewhat of the same capacity the former redevelopment commission board did. again, this is the result of -- to be honest, changing their mind on these things. we are constantly shifting ground with respect to this work. i have to admit it is frustrating that sacramento keeps changing the rules on us, but that is essentially what happened. again the oversight board would have a narrower range of responsibility than it did previously. this new commission would have more of the responsibilities overseeing the activities of the successor agency since that agency is no longer technically part of city government. we have a memo coming to you i think -- and you will get that today that, gets the details of that legislation in much more detail. i just wanted to give you an overview in the meantime.
12:29 pm
thank you, that concludes my presentation. >> good afternoon, commissioners. >> sorry, marie. we have a question for the directors. >> this gets into technicalities a little bit at this point. but would there be shared jurisdiction over previous redevelopment agencies between this body and the planning commission or the board of supervisors? because you say it is a non-city agency. >> the actual powers of the commission and the board wouldn't change with respect to changing redevelopment plans or changing zoning. redevelopment plans were to change, you would have to weigh in, just like you do today, like you used to do. same with the board. none of that changes. the powers of the new commission would be essentially similar to those of the old redevelopment commission. >> but it would be a commission but it wouldn't be a city commission. >> it is a somewhat separate entity, in some

September 27, 2012 12:00pm-12:30pm PDT

TOPIC FREQUENCY Us 3, Dpw 2, Antonini 2, Moore 2, San Francisco 2, Top City 1, The State 1, The City 1, Carl 1, Bevin Dufty 1, Shell Thers 1, Ucsf 1, Malia Cohen 1, Sacramento 1, Us To Help Us 1, Avery 1, Borden 1, Carmen Chu 1, Anne Marie 1, Sugaya 1
Network SFGTV2
Duration 00:30:00
Scanned in San Francisco, CA, USA
Source Comcast Cable
Tuner Channel 89 (615 MHz)
Video Codec mpeg2video
Audio Cocec ac3
Pixel width 544
Pixel height 480
Sponsor Internet Archive
Audio/Visual sound, color